Clearly, the kind of meat you buy has several ramifications. The most obvious are taste and texture, morals, and economic.
Morality comes into play because buying intensively farmed meat means that you condone the bad treatment of animals that is commonly practiced on intensive farms. While it's possible to be a moral person and eat meat, it's not ok to willingly engage in practices that deliberately hurt another living creature. I would argue that if you can't afford to eat meat that is farmed in a way that doesn't hurt the animals, you should eat less meat. Call me elitist, but at the same time realize that most people eat way too much meat as it is.
There's an economic component, clearly, to the kind of meat you buy. Of course, it's not the same thing to purchase meat that is mass-produced by giant conglomerates as to purchase (possibly for a higher price) meat produced by a single smallholder who carefully raises individual animals in humane and even comfortable conditions. With one option you are furthering a world where the concentration of the means of production leads to the reduction of choices and a sort of tyranny of large corporations (which we accept in return for the appearance of lower prices). With the other, you are fostering competition between smaller producers who retain a degree of independence that is the best guarantee against the uniformization of culture and the preservation of regional differences that form the rich cultural fabric that sustains us as humans.
In this way, the economic component becomes a cultural preservation component. Please note that I am not making the case that smallholders are inherently better, culturally speaking, than large corporations. Rather, I am saying that the fact that smallholders must be numerous, they will provide more diversity of options and cultures than a single large corporation. This diversity will manifest itself in the types or breeds of animals that they will raise, in how they will butcher them, etc... even within a single country. This diversity is what leads to a genetic guarantee against debilitating diseases that could wipe out a too uniform livestock population, saddening everyone from PETA-types to meat lovers.
All of these considerations, together with others raised by HFW, mean that a meat eater must be educated, adventurous, and thrifty with meat, ensuring that he gets the most of the meat that he purchases so that it is a satisfying experience informed by a carefully articulated moral stance.
Morality comes into play because buying intensively farmed meat means that you condone the bad treatment of animals that is commonly practiced on intensive farms. While it's possible to be a moral person and eat meat, it's not ok to willingly engage in practices that deliberately hurt another living creature. I would argue that if you can't afford to eat meat that is farmed in a way that doesn't hurt the animals, you should eat less meat. Call me elitist, but at the same time realize that most people eat way too much meat as it is.
There's an economic component, clearly, to the kind of meat you buy. Of course, it's not the same thing to purchase meat that is mass-produced by giant conglomerates as to purchase (possibly for a higher price) meat produced by a single smallholder who carefully raises individual animals in humane and even comfortable conditions. With one option you are furthering a world where the concentration of the means of production leads to the reduction of choices and a sort of tyranny of large corporations (which we accept in return for the appearance of lower prices). With the other, you are fostering competition between smaller producers who retain a degree of independence that is the best guarantee against the uniformization of culture and the preservation of regional differences that form the rich cultural fabric that sustains us as humans.
In this way, the economic component becomes a cultural preservation component. Please note that I am not making the case that smallholders are inherently better, culturally speaking, than large corporations. Rather, I am saying that the fact that smallholders must be numerous, they will provide more diversity of options and cultures than a single large corporation. This diversity will manifest itself in the types or breeds of animals that they will raise, in how they will butcher them, etc... even within a single country. This diversity is what leads to a genetic guarantee against debilitating diseases that could wipe out a too uniform livestock population, saddening everyone from PETA-types to meat lovers.
All of these considerations, together with others raised by HFW, mean that a meat eater must be educated, adventurous, and thrifty with meat, ensuring that he gets the most of the meat that he purchases so that it is a satisfying experience informed by a carefully articulated moral stance.
No comments:
Post a Comment